Shiv Kumari and Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

.....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ravindra Pandey, Rama Shankar Pandey, Vinay Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Lalu Prasad Bhatt

¶23

Court No. - 11

¶24

HON'BLE SAURABH LAVANIA, J.

¶25

With the consent of the parties, the above indicated application(s) are being decided by means of this common order and judgment.

¶26

Heard learned counsel for the parties appearing in the above indicated application(s).

¶27

The APPLICATION U/S 482 No. 7965 of 2024 has been filed seeking following main relief(s):-

¶28

A482 No. 7965 of 2024

¶29

2

¶30

"i. quash the impugned summoning order dated 03.04.2024, passed by Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate Court No.27 Lucknow, summoning the petitioners to face ordeal of trial U/s- 422, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. (Now-321, 115(2), 352, 351(2)(3), BNS), Police Station Chinhat, District-Lucknow, contained as Annexure No. 1, to this petition.

¶31

ii. quash the entire criminal proceeding of Complaint Case No. 114648/2023, instituted by opposite party no. 2, contained as Annexure No. 2, to this petition.

¶32

iii. stay the further proceeding of Complaint Case No. 114648/2023, pending before Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate Court No.27 Lucknow and operation of the impugned summoning order dated 03.04.2024, passed by Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate Court No.27, contained as Annexure No. 1, to this petition."

¶33

The APPLICATION U/S 482 No. 6538 of 2023 has been filed seeking following main relief(s):-

¶34

"to quash the impugned summoning order dated 10.04.2023, passed by/pending in the court of Learned Judicial Magistrate Outer Court ( बाह्य न्यायालय) Nighasan, Lakhimpur Kheri in Complaint Case No. 2221 of 2022 In Re: "Shiv Kumari Versus Suneel Kumar and others", under section-323, 354 Ι.Ρ.C. Police Station-Singahi, District Lakhimpur Kheri as well as application under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. dated 11.10.2021 vide Complaint No. 2221 of 2022 and further proceedings of the case in pursuance thereof and may further kindly be pleased to direct that the applicants shall not be compelled to stand trial, in the ends of justice."

¶35

The APPLICATION U/S 482 No. 7645 of 2024 has been filed seeking following main relief(s):-

¶36

"i. quash the impugned summoning order dated 03.04.2024, passed by Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate Court No.27 Lucknow, summoning the petitioner to face ordeal of trial U/s- 422, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. (Now-321, 115(2), 352, 351(2)(3), BNS), Police Station Chinhat, District-Lucknow, contained as Annexure No. 1, to this petition.

¶37

ii. quash the entire criminal proceeding of Complaint Case No. 114648/2023, instituted by opposite party no. 2, contained as Annexure No. 2, to this petition.

¶38

iii. stay the further proceeding of Complaint Case No. 114648/2023, pending before Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate Court No.27 Lucknow and operation of the impugned summoning order dated 03.04.2024, passed by Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate Court No.27, contained as Annexure No. 1, to this petition."

¶39

Considering the facts of the case and the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicants appearing in APPLICATION U/S 482 No. 7965 of 2024 including the dispute between the parties, this Court vide order dated 10.09.2024 referred the matter to the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court, for amicable settlement between the parties.

¶40

A482 No. 7965 of 2024

¶41

3

¶42

In compliance of order of this Court dated 10.09.2024, the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court alongwith settlement agreement dated 07.08.2025 has submitted its report, which has been annexed as 'Mediation Report 'X', wherein it has been mentioned that the parties were present and they have admitted that they have entered into an agreement voluntarily and their signatures have been verified by their respective counsels.

¶43

The relevant para of settlement agreement 07.08.2025 is extracted herein-under:

¶44

"6. The following settlement has been arrived at between the Parties hereto:-

¶45

A. That the Second Party has agreed that he shall have no objection if the APPLICATION U/s 482 No.7965 of 2024 (Shiv Kumari and Others Vs. State of U.P. & Another) is allowed and the entire proceeding of Complaint Case No. 114648 of 2023 (Sachin Vs. Shivkumar and others) U/S-422, 323, 504, 506 L.P.C. (Now 321, 115 (2), 352, 351 (2) (3), BNS) Police Station-Chinhat, District-Lucknow is quashed by the Hon'ble Court as the parties have amicably resolved their disputes and differences via mediation proceedings.

¶46

B. That the parties have agreed that they shall not pursue the Complaint Case No.114648 of 2023 (Sachin Vs. Shivkumar and others) U/S-422, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. (Now 321, 115 (2), 352, 351 (2) (3), BNS) Police Station-Chinhat, District-Lucknow as well as Complaint Case No.2221 of 2022 U/S 323 and 354 IPC, P. S.-Singahi, DistrictLakhimpur Kheri pending in the Court of Learned Judicial Magistrate, Outline Court Nighasan, Lakhimpur Kheri in terms of this settlement agreement.

¶47

C. That the First Party Shiv Kumari has agreed that she shall have no objection if the APPLICATION U/s 482 No.6538 of 2023 (Sunil and Others Vs. State of U. P. and Another) is allowed and the proceedings of Complaint Case No.2221 of 2022 U/S 323 and 354 IPC, P. S.-Singahi, District-Lakhimpur Kheri pending in the Court of Learned Judicial Magistrate, Outline Court Nighasan, Lakhimpur Kheri are quashed in terms of this settlement agreement.

¶48

D. That the parties have agreed that in addition to the abovementioned case, if any other case is pending between the parties with regard to present dispute, it shall also be disposed of in terms of this settlement agreement.

¶49

E. That it is also agreed between the parties that henceforth no case will be instituted by them against each other or any of their respective family members in future in the form of criminal or civil proceedings in respect of present dispute.

¶50

F. That both the parties shall be bound by the terms and conditions of this Settlement in strict sense. In case of any default, the party committing default shall be liable for playing fraud with the Court, hence for contempt of the Court."

¶51

Considering the aforesaid as also the submissions made by learned Counsel for the parties as also the report of the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court as also the observations made by Apex Court in the case of State of Karnataka Vs. L. Muniswamy and Others, 1977 (2) SCC 699; State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal and Others, 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335; Prashant Bharti Vs. State (NCT of Delhi), (2013) 9 SCC 293; Rajiv Thapar and Ors. Vs. Madan Lal Kapoor, (2013) 3 SCC 330; Ahmad Ali Quraishi and Ors. Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Ors. (2020) 13 SCC 435 , according to which inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. (akin to Section

¶52

A482 No. 7965 of 2024

¶53

4

¶54

528 BNSS, 2023) could be exercised to prevent abuse of process of any Court or otherwise to secure ends of justice, as also the observations made by Apex Court in the case of Ramgopal and others Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, (2022) 14 SCC 531, Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab [2012 10 SCC 303], Mohd. Ibrahim Vs. State of U.P., 2022 SCC Online ALL 106, Gold Quest International Ltd. Vs. State of Tamilnadu, 2014 (15) SCC 235, B.S. Joshi Vs. State of Haryana, 2003 (4) SCC 675, Jitendra Raghuvanshi Vs. Babita Raghuvanshi, 2013(4) SCC 58, Madhavarao Jiwajirao Scindia Vs. Sambhajirao Chandrojirao Angre, 1988 1 SCC 692, Nikhil Merchant Vs. C.B.I. and another, 2008(9) SCC 677, Manoj Sharma Vs. State and others, 2008(16) SCC 1, State of M.P. Vs. Laxmi Narayan and others, 2019(5) SCC 688, Narindra Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and another, (2014) 6 SCC 466, Manoj Kumar and others Vs. State of U.P and others (2008) 8 SCC 781, Union Carbide Corporation and others Vs. Union of India and others (1991) 4 SCC 584, Manohar Lal Sharma Vs. Principal Secretary and others (2014) 2 SCC 532 and Supreme Court Bar Association Vs. Union of India (1998) 4 SCC 409 , according to which, in given facts, based upon the settlements between the parties the criminal proceedings can be quashed, as also the nature of dispute/crime, this Court is of the view that the present application is liable to be allowed as chances of ultimate conviction are extremely bleak and hence no useful purpose would be served by allowing the criminal proceedings to continue. Accordingly, the application(s) are allowed . Consequently, the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 114648/2023 and Complaint Case No. 2221 of 2022, indicated in the prayer clause of the applications under consideration, quoted above, hereby quashed qua the applicants namely Suneel S/o Rameshwar Dayal, Chandan S/o Krishan, Krishan S/o Bindra Prasad, Sachin S/o Krishan alias Keshan Lal, Ramu S/o Bindra Prasad, Pramod S/o Uttam Kumar, Atul Kumar S/o Shiv Kumar, Shiv Kumari W/o Shiv Kumar, Jugul Kishor S/o Ram Asarey and Awadh Ram S/o Rameswar in terms of settlement agreement.

¶55

Office/Registry is directed to send the copy of this order to the court concerned through email/fax for necessary compliance.

¶56

September 9, 2025

¶57

Mohit Singh/-

¶58

Saurabh Lavania,J.)

¶59

Digitally signed by :- MOHIT SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Shiv Kumari and Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shiv Kumari and Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Zilajeet Prajapati Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 2 Others

Lahuri Prasad Kashyap and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Smt. Prema Devi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 2 Others

Rishi Shukla vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another

Sita Soni vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 4 Others

Pramod Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Home Lko . and 5 Others